Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 323820.opn.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 323820.opn.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/323820.opn.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

708 chars

For the commissioner to conclude that the form in which the practice was

registered and reported was sufficient to defeat the existence of a partnership is contrary

to Washington statutes.

Conclusion

When one sets aside the commissioner's unsupported factual findings and

erroneous legal conclusions, there is no basis for his ultimate conclusion that DeFelice

28
             

DeFelice v. Emp '( Sec. Dep '(
No. 32382-0-111- dissent

Dentistry was not a partnership for tax purposes during the period covered by the audit.

Because the commissioner's decision should be reversed, 1 respectfully dissent.

:)ztih ~ ~&:
Siddoway, C.J.
I

29